Talk:2094: Short Selling - Revision history

141.101.105.6 at 18:24, 17 January 2019

2019-01-17T18:24:48Z

J Milstein at 19:37, 7 January 2019

2019-01-07T19:37:47Z

162.158.187.25 at 19:11, 7 January 2019

2019-01-07T19:11:47Z

P at 19:06, 7 January 2019

2019-01-07T19:06:18Z

P: added comment

2019-01-07T18:55:27Z

added comment

J Milstein: "First born" does not imply not yet born

2019-01-07T16:08:53Z

"First born" does not imply not yet born

198.41.238.40 at 04:15, 7 January 2019

2019-01-07T04:15:47Z

141.101.98.178: corrected link

2019-01-06T12:44:36Z

corrected link

141.101.98.178: Need explanation of "squeeze"

2019-01-06T12:41:30Z

Need explanation of "squeeze"

Hkmaly at 18:19, 5 January 2019

2019-01-05T18:19:26Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:24, 17 January 2019
Line 35:		Line 35:
	:Because a child already born has a more settled value. in Ponytail's story the seller is assuming they'll have a rotten 2 bean kid, and basically betting the witch that the kid will be worth 5 beans tops. In your case a trade would be more like a normal sale than a "short sale".[[Special:Contributions/162.158.187.25\|162.158.187.25]] 19:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)		:Because a child already born has a more settled value. in Ponytail's story the seller is assuming they'll have a rotten 2 bean kid, and basically betting the witch that the kid will be worth 5 beans tops. In your case a trade would be more like a normal sale than a "short sale".[[Special:Contributions/162.158.187.25\|162.158.187.25]] 19:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
	Since my kid is already born I have more information and can sell the kid I know to be rotten to a witch who does not have this information. This is like selling a used car. The unborn child is like a new car. In any case, the market in used kids is just as likely to fluctuate, maybe more, as the market in newborns. [[User:J Milstein\|J Milstein]] ([[User talk:J Milstein\|talk]]) 19:37, 7 January 2019 (UTC)		Since my kid is already born I have more information and can sell the kid I know to be rotten to a witch who does not have this information. This is like selling a used car. The unborn child is like a new car. In any case, the market in used kids is just as likely to fluctuate, maybe more, as the market in newborns. [[User:J Milstein\|J Milstein]] ([[User talk:J Milstein\|talk]]) 19:37, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
		+
		+	I actually read a similar fairy tail once, a mermaid asks a fisherman if he would trade his son for good catches. Saying "yes I would, but I do not have a son." the fisherman looks back. The mermaid says that she would come for his oldest son when he is twenty years or something, and giving him good catches. The father warns his son to leave when the son is almost of age, starting him on an journey, but that is another tale. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.6\|141.101.105.6]] 18:24, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:37, 7 January 2019
Line 34:		Line 34:
	Why assume that the first born child is not yet born? I've had one of those for decades. How many magic beans am I offered? [[User:J Milstein\|J Milstein]] ([[User talk:J Milstein\|talk]]) 16:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC)		Why assume that the first born child is not yet born? I've had one of those for decades. How many magic beans am I offered? [[User:J Milstein\|J Milstein]] ([[User talk:J Milstein\|talk]]) 16:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
	:Because a child already born has a more settled value. in Ponytail's story the seller is assuming they'll have a rotten 2 bean kid, and basically betting the witch that the kid will be worth 5 beans tops. In your case a trade would be more like a normal sale than a "short sale".[[Special:Contributions/162.158.187.25\|162.158.187.25]] 19:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)		:Because a child already born has a more settled value. in Ponytail's story the seller is assuming they'll have a rotten 2 bean kid, and basically betting the witch that the kid will be worth 5 beans tops. In your case a trade would be more like a normal sale than a "short sale".[[Special:Contributions/162.158.187.25\|162.158.187.25]] 19:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
		+	Since my kid is already born I have more information and can sell the kid I know to be rotten to a witch who does not have this information. This is like selling a used car. The unborn child is like a new car. In any case, the market in used kids is just as likely to fluctuate, maybe more, as the market in newborns. [[User:J Milstein\|J Milstein]] ([[User talk:J Milstein\|talk]]) 19:37, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:11, 7 January 2019
Line 33:		Line 33:

	Why assume that the first born child is not yet born? I've had one of those for decades. How many magic beans am I offered? [[User:J Milstein\|J Milstein]] ([[User talk:J Milstein\|talk]]) 16:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC)		Why assume that the first born child is not yet born? I've had one of those for decades. How many magic beans am I offered? [[User:J Milstein\|J Milstein]] ([[User talk:J Milstein\|talk]]) 16:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
		+	:Because a child already born has a more settled value. in Ponytail's story the seller is assuming they'll have a rotten 2 bean kid, and basically betting the witch that the kid will be worth 5 beans tops. In your case a trade would be more like a normal sale than a "short sale".[[Special:Contributions/162.158.187.25\|162.158.187.25]] 19:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 What about that word "squeeze" in the title text? We need an explanation. There is a page {{w|Short_squeeze}} on Wikipedia which is surely relevant, but I don't understand it enough to explain it here. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.178|141.101.98.178]] 12:41, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 There is an element of fighting the Witch - when a short seller is set to lose they do all they can to undermine the company. Elon vs. Short Sellers as case in point.
 Why assume that the first born child is not yet born? I've had one of those for decades. How many magic beans am I offered? [[User:J Milstein|J Milstein]] ([[User talk:J Milstein|talk]]) 16:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 ::::If you think short-selling shouldn't be legal, you should look into {{w|Quantitative easing}} and {{w|Fractional-reserve banking}}. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 18:16, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 :::What you (and Ponytail, FWIW, given how muddled the analogy is of course) describe sounds more like selling put options than short selling. [[User:Stannius|Stannius]] ([[User talk:Stannius|talk]]) 19:10, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 ::It is not that hard to understand. Imagine you own 100 apple-shares and do not plan to sell them for the near future. You lend me these 100-shares for 2 weeks. I sell the 100 shares immediately. Now I have 2 weeks to re-buy them. If I’m lucky the price for these 100 shares will decrease somewhen during this 2 weeks. Imaging that I sold the shares for 200$ each, and could re-buy them for 170$: Then I made 30*100$=3000$. Of course you will get a fee for the borrowing. The 3000$-fee are my profit.
 ::The risk here is of course that the shares could increase in price during the 2 weeks – then I would be forced to rebuy them for more that I got AND have to pay you the fee. That’s the reason shorts are more dangerous then longs. --[[User:DaB.|DaB.]] ([[User talk:DaB.|talk]]) 17:36, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:08, 7 January 2019
Line 28:		Line 28:

	There is an element of fighting the Witch - when a short seller is set to lose they do all they can to undermine the company. Elon vs. Short Sellers as case in point.		There is an element of fighting the Witch - when a short seller is set to lose they do all they can to undermine the company. Elon vs. Short Sellers as case in point.
		+
		+	Why assume that the first born child is not yet born? I've had one of those for decades. How many magic beans am I offered? [[User:J Milstein\|J Milstein]] ([[User talk:J Milstein\|talk]]) 16:08, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:15, 7 January 2019
Line 26:		Line 26:

	What about that word "squeeze" in the title text? We need an explanation. There is a page {{w\|Short_squeeze}} on Wikipedia which is surely relevant, but I don't understand it enough to explain it here. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.178\|141.101.98.178]] 12:41, 6 January 2019 (UTC)		What about that word "squeeze" in the title text? We need an explanation. There is a page {{w\|Short_squeeze}} on Wikipedia which is surely relevant, but I don't understand it enough to explain it here. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.178\|141.101.98.178]] 12:41, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
		+
		+	There is an element of fighting the Witch - when a short seller is set to lose they do all they can to undermine the company. Elon vs. Short Sellers as case in point.

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:44, 6 January 2019
Line 25:		Line 25:
	someone takes !-> they believe !-> their strategy; 1 != 2; will (optative) -> shall (future); he -> who; witches -> witch's; would (desiderative) -> should (conditional) [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 02:38, 5 January 2019 (UTC)		someone takes !-> they believe !-> their strategy; 1 != 2; will (optative) -> shall (future); he -> who; witches -> witch's; would (desiderative) -> should (conditional) [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 02:38, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

−	What about that word "squeeze" in the title text? We need an explanation. There is a page {{w\|~~Short Squeeze~~}} on Wikipedia which is surely relevant, but I don't understand it enough to explain it here. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.178\|141.101.98.178]] 12:41, 6 January 2019 (UTC)	+	What about that word "squeeze" in the title text? We need an explanation. There is a page {{w\|Short_squeeze}} on Wikipedia which is surely relevant, but I don't understand it enough to explain it here. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.178\|141.101.98.178]] 12:41, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:41, 6 January 2019
Line 24:		Line 24:

	someone takes !-> they believe !-> their strategy; 1 != 2; will (optative) -> shall (future); he -> who; witches -> witch's; would (desiderative) -> should (conditional) [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 02:38, 5 January 2019 (UTC)		someone takes !-> they believe !-> their strategy; 1 != 2; will (optative) -> shall (future); he -> who; witches -> witch's; would (desiderative) -> should (conditional) [[User:Lysdexia\|Lysdexia]] ([[User talk:Lysdexia\|talk]]) 02:38, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
		+
		+	What about that word "squeeze" in the title text? We need an explanation. There is a page {{w\|Short Squeeze}} on Wikipedia which is surely relevant, but I don't understand it enough to explain it here. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.178\|141.101.98.178]] 12:41, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 ::It makes sense from what I remember from economics in high school: you buy stocks in advance for significantly above asking price hoping they gain more value before the deal happens, so let's say 1 share of company X is worth 20$ right now. Now I can offer you a contract that I'll buy this share from you for 50$, but on the condition that the deal happens in a week. If the value of the company stays the same, I make a loss; but if the value rises within that week and one share is suddenly worth, let's say 2000$, I make an immense profit. (divide each value I gave by ten and you have the bean/witch/child analogy from the comic) It's basically gambling on the hope that the value of stock rises. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.50.118|172.68.50.118]] 17:24, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
 :::How are stock markets even still legal? This is insane! [[User:Fabian42|Fabian42]] ([[User talk:Fabian42|talk]]) 17:42, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
-::::what would be insane would be trying to outlaw stock markets.  They’ve been around for hundreds of years; business people are going to find ways to trade.
+::::what would be insane would be trying to outlaw stock markets.  They’ve been around for hundreds of years; business people are going to find ways to trade.{{unsigned|172.68.65.6}}
 ::::If you think short-selling shouldn't be legal, you should look into {{w|Quantitative easing}} and {{w|Fractional-reserve banking}}. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 18:16, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 :::What you (and Ponytail, FWIW, given how muddled the analogy is of course) describe sounds more like selling put options than short selling. [[User:Stannius|Stannius]] ([[User talk:Stannius|talk]]) 19:10, 4 January 2019 (UTC)